Why is it Cool to vote for Obama?

[GQ Chris]

This election has turned the tide, in the San Francisco Chronicle today, there were about 4 articles writing nice things about Sarah Palin, one was written by former San Francisco Mayor and Democrat Willie Brown, and another by a Woman who is a Feminist!!

 

[RosaVernal]

Yes, because we need someone under investigation for abuse of power who's got an oil lobbyist as a lieutenant governor (not to mention the campaign donations) as our VP.

No offense, but I seriously wonder which of you are the greedy and which are the deceived.

 

[Atlantians]

Why is McCain called a "maverick", anyway?

95% of his votes were in line with what Bush wanted.

90% and the vast majority of those were not significant policy issue related but casual senate business.

 

[Atlantians]

I see your point, trust me. BUT no one, especially the government, should be able to tell me what to do with MY body. It is up to the person to decide if they have the mental fortitude to carry a child that is a by product of rape or incest.

Do what you will with your own body. The baby is not a part of your body.

Whether I choose to have a child or not is none of your business or the government's.

Then please stop the Government from funding Planned Parenthood.

For me it's simple, I am pro-life for myself. Meaning, I couldn't see myself having an abortion (unless it's life or death). It's my child, no matter how it was conceived. But pro-choice for everyone else. Meaning, I respect their right to choose, it's none of my business, and I have no rights over their body.

Its not their body thats being melted by acid, ripped to pieces by a vacuume, or torn and sliced to pieces by scissors.
It's the babies.

This is a complicated subject, we can debate this all day, BUT nothing anyone says will change my mind.

I find it odd that you would celebrate and proudly declare that nothing anyone says will cause you to reconsider the support of mass murder.

I'm Pro-life too, just so you know. But I want the right to choose. So we're just going to have to agree to disagree. I'm right from my side and you're right from yours.

Either you are right and he is wrong or you are wrong and he is right.
You can't have it both ways.

blaming the homeless for their own situation is a culture kept alive and well by the conservative elements of society.

My former best friend is homeless.
Why? Because he refused to actually do anything with his life.
He was given opportunity after opportunity.
He refused them all.
He could get a job. He doesn't.

The Homeless in the Tenderloin of San Francisco are almost entirely drug addicts and alcoholics. They spend their Social Security and Welfare each month on drugs and booze. They could stop. They don't.

Quite a few have mental issues and need help. They are the ones we need to focus resources on.

you're 5 years old and you live in Zimbabwe. you are dying because of a lack of food and the water you drink is tainted. your parents have been killed by the government and you live in a makeshift refugee camp on the border with another family. Where's the choice there?? that 5 year old chose that life? can that 5 year old just 'fix himself up' how can you choose the help the unborn but not the living infants? because they're not American? if not, then do you advocate that abortion should be illegal only in america but acceptable in other countries, because non-american babies will be killed?

In other words:
I can't win this debate, so I have to appeal to emotional stories.
I know that talking about pro-lifers in America not helping the unaborted babies... because that would be quickly proven false.
Hey I got it! Lets criticise American pro-lifers because they are not omni-potent and can't help everyone everywhere!
Conclusion: Since we can't entirely help every 5 year old in Zimbabe, lets not protect babies here!

Advocate or legislate? why not instead of making the abortion solution law or government responsibility, why not just make it something that missionaries and charities take care of?

They do. Crisis Pregnancy Centres.

and why not advocate good choice rather then law. because the American government could do a massive amount to alivate the suffering of innocents in this world, but its voters just dont care one bit. its all about abortion.

That is a pure canard. Americans help the rest of the world far more than you seem to think. Many, if not most, of those who go and help and give are Conservatives who would also be Pro-life.

here's the bottom line. there is a complete lack of consistancey when you say you are 'pro life' and against abortion because you have a moral objection to the infliction of death upon the innocent defenseless and those with no choice. BUT IGNORE through one issue voting, every living innocent and defenseless person on the planet.

That is pure nonsense.

Yes, because we need someone under investigation for abuse of power who's got an oil lobbyist as a lieutenant governor (not to mention the campaign donations) as our VP.

No offense, but I seriously wonder which of you are the greedy and which are the deceived.

She imposed a windfall profits tax on the oil companies in Alaska.

Not the actions of someone influenced by a lobbyist.

And who, praytell, is conducting that 'investigation'?

 

[justagirl08]

Yes it is. I would not want to have a leader that we are afraid to make fun of, I think that would be a sad day indeed for Democracy. This process should not be taken so seriously as many do, yes it's important, make a good decision, vote well, but don't let your life be consumed with it, it's as bad or worse than any other type of media sensationalism.

T,

I am not afraid to poke fun at my leaders. However, that was not what he was speaking about to me. Please go back and read the thread to understand what I was referring to.

As for lecturing me, you don't have the right to do so. I have been voting for 20 years and I have always been serious about it. My family did not fight and die for this country for me not to understand the true privilage I have to vote and to view this as a serious matter.

Your next incorrect assumption is that is all consuming. Again, we are on a message board and no one knows what life we each lead off of the internet.

J

 

[charlie_hunter]

Do what you will with your own body. The baby is not a part of your body.


Then please stop the Government from funding Planned Parenthood.


Its not their body thats being melted by acid, ripped to pieces by a vacuume, or torn and sliced to pieces by scissors.
It's the babies.

I find it odd that you would celebrate and proudly declare that nothing anyone says will cause you to reconsider the support of mass murder.


Either you are right and he is wrong or you are wrong and he is right.
You can't have it both ways.


My former best friend is homeless.
Why? Because he refused to actually do anything with his life.
He was given opportunity after opportunity.
He refused them all.
He could get a job. He doesn't.

The Homeless in the Tenderloin of San Francisco are almost entirely drug addicts and alcoholics. They spend their Social Security and Welfare each month on drugs and booze. They could stop. They don't.

Quite a few have mental issues and need help. They are the ones we need to focus resources on.

In other words:
I can't win this debate, so I have to appeal to emotional stories.
I know that talking about pro-lifers in America not helping the unaborted babies... because that would be quickly proven false.
Hey I got it! Lets criticise American pro-lifers because they are not omni-potent and can't help everyone everywhere!
Conclusion: Since we can't entirely help every 5 year old in Zimbabe, lets not protect babies here!


They do. Crisis Pregnancy Centres.

That is a pure canard. Americans help the rest of the world far more than you seem to think. Many, if not most, of those who go and help and give are Conservatives who would also be Pro-life.
That is pure nonsense.


She imposed a windfall profits tax on the oil companies in Alaska.

Not the actions of someone influenced by a lobbyist.

And who, praytell, is conducting that 'investigation'?

firstly, you seem to think i'm defending abortion or something? not sure where you got that one from.

you are completly failing to see my point which is the lack of consistancy and logic with conservative thought. i'll try and spell it out again in a slightly different way.

*conservative thinking* I advocate small/no government, the government has no right getting involved in my affairs. if i choose to a gun (or a surface to air missle as some members here have expressed), i should be able to own one. If i dont want to get involved in charity or the support of welfare, thats my choice, i shouldnt have to. I should choose what school I want, not be forced to spend my taxes on state ones. I should be able to choose to fund my own healthcare, not have it taxed out of me against my choice. etc etc etc." HOWEVER the 'choice' to have an abortion is something the government should control absolutly?!?!?!?! with no say by the citizens?!?!?!? they either have a degree of control or they dont!! if the government has no say in your life, then why should they control that???

now............here's where the problem is. the obvious rebuttal is that 'unlike education/health/guns/taxes which affect adults, an unborn baby is defenceless' yes! However, if you belive that defending the defenseless is a government concern (which you do if you think abortion should be a legal issue) then why dosent the government defend ALL those who are defenseless in society? it is completely hyprocritical to say you belive in the legal defence of those who cannot support themselves yet be so passionatly opposed to government efforts to help those that cannot support themselves!!

i'll leave on this point..............do you belive that America should be pro choice if its citizens vote pro choice? if not, you support a government that makes laws which are against the will and desires of its citizens. and if it can do it for abortion......why not everything else?

 

[SCKeith803]

Ehhh I did 6 years in the marine corps and though I hated being in the sandbox I do think we need a strong leader and obama is not strong...The Bible says that everyone including America will turn there back on Israel but what do I know...see what Im getting at?!?! plus he would stand up for his muslim faith before Christianity anyday...BLAH ON THE OBAMA LLAMA

 

[Tinkerbell33]

Erm. Obama isn't a muslim. Seriously, do your research.

 

[Tinkerbell33]

Am I the only one who finds Palin terrifying? lol

 

[Wren]

Erm. Obama isn't a muslim. Seriously, do your research.

Am I the only one who finds Palin terrifying? lol

No, you are definitely not. The more I find out about her, the more the idea of her anywhere near the White House scares me.

 

[GQ Chris]

Am I the only one who finds Palin terrifying? lol

Pretty much you and other liberals. She's completely opposite of everything liberals like.

 

[* kittie *]

Ironic, because I think the same way of Obama

 

[Atlantians]

wow! you missed the point more then any of the other fundamentalists on here!

Ad hominem. I never disparaged you or tried to marginalize you with loaded terms.

firstly, you seem to think i'm defending abortion or something? not sure where you got that one from.

Anyone who believes that abortions is someone's "choice" is defending it.

you are completly failing to see my point

I doubt it.

which is the lack of consistancy and logic with conservative thought.

Or your charicature of it.

And some of what you say is 'Conservative thinking' is actually 'Constitutional thinking' and 'Economic Conservitism'.

Often they go hand and hand but they are mutually exclussive.

*conservative thinking*I advocate small/no government,

No Conservatives advocates no government. That is Anarachy which is generally more on the liberal side.

And your definition of small Government is not accurate.

the government has no right getting involved in my affairs.

That is a straw man of small Government.

There is a "within reason" aspect.

The within reason aspects is the will of the people for the Government to dictate what it will oppose and support.

Murder, rape, ect. Are all things that the Government has every right to fight against.

if i choose to a gun (or a surface to air missle as some members here have expressed), i should be able to own one.

Second Amendment.

Though personally I would oppose large munitions being owned by individuals.

The founding fathers said "right to bear arms" not "right to bear a weapons depot".

If i dont want to get involved in charity or the support of welfare, thats my choice, i shouldnt have to.

Conservatives spend more money and more time helping charities than Liberals do. Liberals generally expect the Government to do the charity work for them.

Oh, wait, I am making a generalised caricature. I wonder who else is doing that right now?

However, these are facts:
Conservatives do give more to Charities than Liberals.
Christians do run far more charities and organizations to assist people than any other group liberal or conservative.

I should choose what school I want, not be forced to spend my taxes on state ones.

I agree that we should be able to choose what school we want.
But I also believe that we should support state run schools also.
Few Economic Conservatives would disagree with that.

In any case, it is again a straw man you are waking with that axe.

I should be able to choose to fund my own healthcare, not have it taxed out of me against my choice. etc etc etc."

That is generally because most Conservatives believe that private healthcare works far better overall than public healthcare.

Personally I don't think we can afford a public healthcare system.
I would love one as a 'base' standard. With private healthcare being autonomous and in strong competition and thus far better overall.

But I don't think we can afford a public healthcare system in any case, unfortunately.
Also the buerocracy that would get involved would be terribly damaging.

HOWEVER the 'choice' to have an abortion is something the government should control absolutly?!?!?!?! with no say by the citizens?!?!?!? they either have a degree of control or they dont!! if the government has no say in your life, then why should they control that???

False dichotomy based on a straw man.

Opposing murder is not the same as supporting big Government.

now............here's where the problem is. the obvious rebuttal is that 'unlike education/health/guns/taxes which affect adults, an unborn baby is defenceless' yes!

That is not the obvious rebuttal.

The rebuttal is that the Government has every right to oppose immoral actions and support moral actions as per the will of the people as per the Constitution.

Economic Conservatives believe that a more market-style education system, lower taxes, private healthcare, and the like is best for the nation.

Constiutionalists believe that stronger local and state Governments should do far more of the Governing and that no one has a right to ban things provided for in the Constitution without ammending the Constitution.

Moral Conservatives oppose homosexual marriage, abortion, murder, rape, and any immoral and evil deed.


And on another note:
Foreign Policy Conservatives believe in a strong military and a strong hand in extra-national affairs.
Some elements are 'isolationists' but that is generally not the norm and seems to be shifting to be more common on the liberal side.

However, if you belive that defending the defenseless is a government concern (which you do if you think abortion should be a legal issue) then why dosent the government defend ALL those who are defenseless in society? it is completely hyprocritical to say you belive in the legal defence of those who cannot support themselves yet be so passionatly opposed to government efforts to help those that cannot support themselves!!

Again, Straw man, false accusations, false dichotomies, misrepresentations of the opposing views, ect.

i'll leave on this point..............do you belive that America should be pro choice if its citizens vote pro choice?

Yes. If it is the will of the people. Because this is a Democratic Republic.

However, such a thing goes directly against God's will and would incite his wrath against those people and that civilization as it did with the Greeks, Romans, Canaanites, Amalakites, and so many other groups that despised God's law.

 

[Reanimation]

Am I the only one who finds Palin terrifying? lol

Definitely not. I really, really hope that she doesn't end up in power.

 

[justagirl08]

All,

I do not find Palin terrifying at all. In fact, I am energized to have her on the ticket. She has done some good for her state and I am eager to see what she can do for the country.

I also like the fact she is a Godly woman.

J

 

[swtldy622]

Definitely not. I really, really hope that she doesn't end up in power.

I am with you guys/girls. I would hate for McCain to get sick and for her to take his place.

 

[charlie_hunter]

right, time to crack out the Orwell and get to the reasons to how many American conservatives can hold their views.

Doublethink. The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them . . . . To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies — all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth.

Doublethink is not something exclusive to conservatives. its something moreso exclusive to fundamentalists, which exist on both sides of politics in equal measure and these are the people i'm truely against, those that see it as just plain black at white. It just so happens that all the fundamentalists here seem to be conservative. Here are some examples of doublethink that political fundamentalists believe (on both sides):

*Believing that Bush is a bumbling fool that cant string a sentance together, yet somehow masterminded 9/11 and is masterminding the New World Order

*Believing that sexual education is the responsiblity of the parents and Jamie Spears falling pregnant is the fault of her upbringing, but Palins kid falling pregnant has nothing to do with her mother being at fault.

*Believing that the government should depsense moral justice but believe that private charity/religion should be responsible for dispensing moral justice

the list goes on, but i'm hungry and need to eat.

but doublethink is whats keeping conservative America afloat. the ability to belive contradicting ideals.

 

[justagirl08]

Charlie,

I have finally grown impatient with your slander of American's and those of us who are conservative.

To be blunt, you do not have the right to judge on this level.

May I suggest you either go into the political forums or perhaps temper your responses.

J

 

[kingoffools13]

*is laughing* "Stand Up Chuck And Let Em See You!" - haha, gotta keep the milk from coming out of my nose, what a tool. Between that and the lipstick on a pig comments the Dem nominees are coming out so strong it hurts my sides from the rushed breaths in between bouts of laughter.

K
O
f

 

[* kittie *]

I agree with justagirl.

Charlie, you push quite a bit for hypocrisy and inconsistency, but over your last several posts, you have accused us of doing some things while you have done the same. Explaining the subconscious effects of "Obama bin Laden" while pairing Bush into the McCain/Palin candidacy? How does that work? Regardless of if that was your intent, that has been one way Obama used in trying to get the voters to go against McCain. But I'm guessing you either never heard of that or let it go as unimportant?

Attempting to rebut my OWN (remind you I started off giving a personal opinion, not a true/false statement) reasons for not trusting Obama's motives while you used Palin's pregnant daughter as a reason for her mistrust (actually that one is more a moral question, while mine is a PERSONAL reason to not trust what is underlying him). Since you are not voting here, I'll let it go as simply your opinions on how relevant both sides' ideas are. So then you count their opinion as gospel while mine gives you reason to mock me? If you laugh at my ideas without giving it ear, why should I trust that you understand much?

And please, if you're going to "debate", then don't resort to a multitude of fallacies. Please check your statements over then write back. No need to constantly bash what you think are the fundamentalists. After a while, it doesn't work, because if you actually look at the other side, you began to see faults there too. Hey...Why not for fun, won't you go critique the other side?